Akhilesh Kumar Pingle vs Central Coalfields Limited & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 2274 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Akhilesh Kumar Pingle vs Central Coalfields Limited & Ors on 11 August, 2025

Author: Deepak Roshan

Bench: Deepak Roshan

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          W.P.(S) No. 256 of 2017
Akhilesh Kumar Pingle                                ... ... Petitioner(s)
                                Versus
Central coalfields Limited & Ors.               ... ... Respondent(s)
                                With
                         W.P.(S) No. 261 of 2017
Smt. Sulekha Kumari                                    ... ... Petitioner(s)
                                Versus
Central Coalfields Limited & Ors.                  ... ... Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner(s)            : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate
                                   Mr. Suman Kr. Ghosh, Advocate
                                   Ms. Sugandha Khalkho, Advocate
For the Respondent(s)            : Mr. A. K. Mehta, Advocate
                                   Mr. Pratyush, Advocate
                                 --------

Order No. 14 /Dated: 11th August 2025

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially a charge-sheet was issued against this petitioner to which a full-fledged enquiry was conducted and after issuance of second show-cause notice the petitioner has replied to the same but all of a sudden, the said charge-sheet was withdrawn without assigning any reason. He further submits that just after a month a second charge-sheet was issued for de novo enquiry for the same and similar charge what was withdrawn earlier without assigning any reason.

Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that there are several judgments in favour of the petitioner as well as against the petitioner.

Having regard to the aforesaid submission, the following question of law arises for consideration before this Court:

(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the respondent-coal company was justified in issuing the second

charge-sheet for the same and similar charge what was withdrawn by them without assigning any reason.

(ii) Whether continuation of the proceeding initiated by the second charge-sheet is maintainable only due to the fact that the charge is same and similar with that of first charge which was withdrawn by them by ordering de novo enquiry.

(iii) Whether the case of the petitioner is covered by the judgment passed in W.P.(S) No. 3192 of 2019 with analogous cases wherein it has been dealt in detail on what basis the disciplinary proceeding should await till conclusion of criminal trial.

List these cases on 10.09.2025 under the heading "Final Disposal".

(Deepak Roshan, J.) Amit